Module 2 1

INTRODUCTION TO THE
PHILOSOPHY OF THE HUMAN

PERSON
September 15, 2022
TRUTH?
SCIENTIFIC
TRUTH = TRUTH
BASED ON
FACTS
DOMAINS OF TRUTH
‘A STUDY FROM JAYWARD PITKIN UNIVERSITY SHOWS THAT 95%
OF MEN AND WOMEN WHO ARE TALLER THAN THE AVERAGE
HEIGHT ARE MORE LIKELY TO BECOME SUCCESSFUL AND HAPPY IN
THEIR CAREERS.’
OBJECTIVE TRUTH
DOMAINS OF TRUTH
SOME SCIENTIST, HOWEVER POINT OUT THAT
SCIENTIFIC TRUTHS ARE PART OF JUST ONE
AMONG MANY WAYS OF UNDERSTANDING TRUTH
PEOPLE WHO BELIEVERS

CONDEMN OTHERS BASE THEIR
FOR HAVING A LIVES ON
RELIGION AND FOR UNVERIFIED
BELIEVING IN GOD
TRUTHS
DOMAINS OF TRUTH
BELIEVERS ARE JUDGED TO BE IRRATIONAL BECAUSE THEY
CANNOT DEMONSTRATE THE TRUTH OF THEIR FAITH
ONLY THOSE ONLY THOSE

WHO BELIEVE IN WHO BELIEVE IN
THINGS THAT SCIENTIFIC
CAN BE VERIFIED TRUTHS ARE
ARE RATIONAL RATIONAL
DOMAINS OF TRUTH
ALMOST EVERYONE OF US IS
IRRATIONAL
BECAUSE MANY PARTS OF OUR LIVES REST IN THINGS

THAT WE CONSIDER AS TRUE EVEN IF THEY ARE NOT
SCIENTIFICALLY PROVEN
DOMAINS OF TRUTH
PHILOSOPHY HAS BEEN AWARE THAT TRUTH
ABOUT TRUTH REMAINS TO BE A QUESTION FOR
THOUSAND OF YEARS NOW
TO NARROWLY CONFINE TRUTH TO THE SCIENTIFIC

WAY OF THINKING IS TO CLAIM THAT THERE IS ONLY ONE
WAY OF UNDERSTANDING TRUTH.
DOMAINS OF TRUTH
JÜRGEN THERE ARE OTHER DOMAINS IN

HABERMAS LIFE IN WHICH WE UNDERSTAND
TRUTH DIFFERENTLY
UNIVERSAL
PRAGMATICS OBJECTIVE SOCIAL
DOMAIN DOMAIN
STUDY OF THE
STRUCTURE OF
COMMUNICATIVE
LANGUAGE
PERSONAL
DOMAIN
DOMAINS OF OBJECTIVE
TRUTH DOMAIN
SUBJECTIVE
THIS PERTAINS TO THE TRUTHS
NATURAL WORLD THAT
MANTAINS A RELATIVE
INDEPENDENCE FROM THE TYPHOON
PERSPECTIVE AND ATTITUDE SEASON
OF HUMAN BEINGS THAT
PERCEIVE THEM WATER’S
BOILING POINT
DOMAINS OF SOCIAL
TRUTH DOMAIN
TRUTH :
A GENERAL AGREEMENT OR CONSENSUS ON
WHAT IS RIGHT AS OPPOSED TO WHAT IS WRONG
PRODUCTS OF AN ‘AGREEMENT’ IN THE SOCIETY

THAT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED OVER TIME
THESE TRUTHS ARE ‘CREATED

CAN BE CHANGED
OR CONSTRUCTED’ BY PEOPLE THROUGH A CRITICAL
EXAMINATION
DOMAINS OF PERSONAL
TRUTH DOMAIN
TRUTH
:
SINCERITY
A PERSON WHO PROVES TO

BE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT AUTHENTIC
HE DECLARES ABOUT
HIMSELF IS REGARDED AS
CAN BE TRUSTED
OR TRUSTWORTHY
TRUTH AND JUSTIFICATION
TRUTH CAN BE
RICHARD RORTY UNDERSTOOD AS WHAT
HAS PASSED “PROCEDURES
OF JUSTIFICATION”
THE PROCESS OF PROVING

THE TRUTH OR VALIDITY OF
JUSTIFICATION A STATEMENT
MADE UP OF WAYS OF
CRITICALLY TESTING A CLAIM
AGAINST CERTAIN CRITERIA
OBJECTIVE TRUTHS ARE TESTED AGAINST

DOMAIN EMPIRICAL EVIDENCES
SOCIAL TRUTHS ARE TESTED THEIR ACCEPTABILITY

DOMAIN TO A PARTICULAR TIME IN HISTORY
PERSONAL TRUTHS ARE TESTED AGAINST THE

CONSISTENCY AND AUTHENTICITY OF THE
DOMAIN PERSON WHO CLAIMS IT
OBJECTIVE TRUTHS ARE TESTED AGAINST

DOMAIN EMPIRICAL EVIDENCES
SOCIAL TRUTHS ARE TESTED THEIR ACCEPTABILITY

DOMAIN TO A PARTICULAR TIME IN HISTORY
PERSONAL TRUTHS ARE TESTED AGAINST THE

CONSISTENCY AND AUTHENTICITY OF THE
DOMAIN PERSON WHO CLAIMS IT
METHODS OF PHILOSOPHIZING
GABRIEL PHILOSOPHY IS NOT LIKE THE

SCIENCES THAT HAVE A CLEAR
MARCEL METHOD IN ARRIVING AT TRUTHS
RENE DESCARTES AND WESTERN MODERN

THINKING
THE WAY OF TAO


THINKING
THE MIND NOT THE BODY CAN ARRIVE AT

CLEAR AND DISTINCT IDEAS WHICH
CANNOT BE DOUBTED
THERE IS ONE THING THAT
CANNOT BE DOUBTED DOUBT

THINKING
DOUBT THINKING
WHEN ONE THINKS, ONE

“I AM! I EXIST!” INTUITIVELY OR IMMEDIATELY
REALIZES THAT HE EXIST

THINKING
IMMORTALITY OF THE EXISTENCE OF

THE SOUL GOD
THE SEARCH FOR TRUTH LEADS TO A DETACHMENT FROM THE MATERIAL

WORLD OUTSIDE OF ONE’S MINDS AND A FOCUS ON THE INNER WORLD OF
CONSCIOUSNESS AND THINKING
PHENOMENOLOGY EDMUND HUSSERL
scientific study of the essential structures of consciousness
we can find certainty, which philosophy has always sought

EXISTENTIALISM SOREN KIERKEGAARD
the authentic self was the personally chosen self, as opposed to public or
"herd” identity
JEAN PAUL SARTE

emphasizes the importance of free individual choice, regardless of the power of
other people to influence and coerce our desires, beliefs, and decisions
POST ANALYTIC TRADITION
LUDWIG WITTGENSTEIN
Language cannot objectively describe truth

Language is socially conditioned and to some significant degree, philosophical
problems, puzzles, and errors are rooted in language.
LOGICAL AND CRITICAL THINKING
Distinguishing facts and opinions or personal feelings.

TAKE NOTE
TOP-DOWN PROCESSING
General to Specific (Deductive Reasoning)
BOTTOM-UP PROCESSING
Specific to General (Inductive Reasoning)

ABSTRACTION TRUTH AND OPINION
A STATEMENT OF JUDGEMENT OF A PERSON

OPINION ABOUT SOMETHING IN THE WORLD
STATEMENTS OF JUDGEMENT THAT ARE IN

NEED OF FURTHER JUSTIFICATION
TRUTH AND HOW TO CRITICALLY
OPINION EXAMINE OPNIONS
OPINION JUSTIFICATION TRUTH
A PHILOSOPHICAL MIND MUST THEN BE PREPARED TO

EXAMINE ARGUMENTS SUPPORTING AN OPINION
FIRST CLARIFY IS ARGUMENT

ARGUMENT IS A GROUP OF STATEMENTS THAT

SERVE TO SUPPORT A CONCLUSION
‘THERE IS NO HOPE IN THE PHILIPPINES

GOVERNMENT’
‘THERE IS NO HOPE IN THE PHILIPPINES GOVERNMENT

BECAUSE MANY OFFICIALS ARE CORRUPT , AND FILIPINO
VOTERS CONTINUE TO ELECT THEM’
‘THERE IS NO HOPE IN THE PHILIPPINES GOVERNMENT

BECAUSE MANY OFFICIALS ARE CORRUPT , AND FILIPINO
VOTERS CONTINUE TO ELECT THEM’
CLAIM PREMISE
CONCLUSION OF THE REASONS USED

TO SUPPORT THE
THE ARGUMENT CONCLUSION
NOT ALL
ARGUMENTS ARE LOGIC STUDIES
GOOD ARGUMENTS
GENUINE ARGUMENT FALSE ONES OR

FAKE ARGUMENTS
ARE A GROUP OF STATEMENTS THAT APPEAR

FALLACIES TO BE ARGUMENTS BUT FAIL TO SUPPORT
THE CONCLUSION
THERE IS NO HOPE IN THE PHILIPPINE

GOVERNMENT, BECAUSE THE PHILIPPINES IS A
TROPICAL COUNTRY
ARGUMENTUM FALLACIES ARGUMENTUM AD

AD HOMINEM MISERICORDIAM
ARGUMENTUM ARGUMENTUM
AD BACULUM AD POPULUM
THERE IS NO HOPE IN THE PHILIPPINE

GOVERNMENT, BECAUSE THE PHILIPPINES IS A
TROPICAL COUNTRY
ARGUMENTUM FALLACIES ARGUMENTUM AD

AD HOMINEM MISERICORDIAM
ARGUMENTUM ARGUMENTUM
AD BACULUM AD POPULUM
Define what is a logical fallacy.
Define and give examples on the following
fallacies:
ARGUMENTUM AD ARGUMENTUM AD
BACULUM HOMINEM
ARGUMENTUM AD ARGUMENTUM AD
MISERICORDIAM POPULUM
FALLACY OF DIVISION
OPINION EXAMINE OPINIONS
ARGUMENTUM ARGUMENT AGAINST THE
AD HOMINEM PERSON
A fallacy used when people convince others that
someone’s argument should be rejected because of
the person’s personal background
The rightness or wrongness of a claim should not be

affected by the background of the person claiming
it.
AD HOMINEM PERSON
VICTIM-BLAMING when it comes to

Example: rape and sexual harrassment
If you were wearing something revealing
What were
too much you
skin, thenwearing
the person when
who
violated you should not be blamed. You
the incident happened
have no right to argue against the
anyway?
violation of your dignity if you were
carrying yourself like a slut.
AD HOMINEM PERSON
Seeks to blur the wrongness of the act of sexual
harassment by focusing on the personality, gender, and
other circumstances of the victim.
ARGUMENTUM
AD BACULUM APPEAL TO FORCE
Used by people who want to win a conflict by issuing

threats to their opponents
Example:
ARGUMENTUM AD APPEAL TO PITY / APPEAL TO
MISERICORDIAM EMOTION
Used by people who want to win people over by
manipulating their emotion
Favorite tactic of politicians during campaign

periods
ARGUMENTUM AD APPEAL TO PITY / APPEAL TO
MISERICORDIAM EMOTION
Example: Politician A who had been reported to be

involved in massive corruption of public
funds, would pay high rates of advertisement
in the media portraying him as a poor and
suffering man
People should vote for politicians because of

the merits and capability to serve the public.
ARGUMENTUM
AD POPULUM BANDWAGON FALLACY
Used by appealing to the popular sentiment of the

public
Favorite marketing strategy by advertising agencies

ARGUMENTUM
AD POPULUM BANDWAGON FALLACY
Example:
BANDWAGON FALLACY
Example:
ARGUMENTUM AD ARGUMENT AGAINST THE PERSON
HOMINEM
ARGUMENTUM AD
BACULUM APPEAL TO FORCE
ARGUMENTUM AD
MISERICORDIAM APPEAL TO PITY
ARGUMENTUM AD
POPULUM BANDWAGON FALLACY
FALLACY OF DIVISION
FALLACY OF DIVISION
A fallacy of division is an informal fallacy

that occurs when one reasons that
something that is true for a whole must
also be true of all or some of its parts.
ARGUMENTUM
AD APPEAL TO TRADITION
ANTIQUITATEM
a logical fallacy that relies on traditions and customs to
justify a point of view
Begging the question
assuming the thing or idea to be proven is true; also

known as circular argument.
Cause-and-effect
Assuming "cause-and-effect" relationship between

unrelated events
Fallacy of composition
Assuming that what is true of a part is true for the

whole

Module 2 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Module 2 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

INTRODUCTION TO THE

PHILOSOPHY OF THE HUMAN

PEOPLE WHO BELIEVERS

ONLY THOSE ONLY THOSE

BECAUSE MANY PARTS OF OUR LIVES REST IN THINGS

TO NARROWLY CONFINE TRUTH TO THE SCIENTIFIC

JÜRGEN THERE ARE OTHER DOMAINS IN

PRODUCTS OF AN ‘AGREEMENT’ IN THE SOCIETY

THESE TRUTHS ARE ‘CREATED

A PERSON WHO PROVES TO

THE PROCESS OF PROVING

OBJECTIVE TRUTHS ARE TESTED AGAINST

SOCIAL TRUTHS ARE TESTED THEIR ACCEPTABILITY

PERSONAL TRUTHS ARE TESTED AGAINST THE

OBJECTIVE TRUTHS ARE TESTED AGAINST

SOCIAL TRUTHS ARE TESTED THEIR ACCEPTABILITY

PERSONAL TRUTHS ARE TESTED AGAINST THE

GABRIEL PHILOSOPHY IS NOT LIKE THE

RENE DESCARTES AND WESTERN MODERN

THE WAY OF TAO

RENE DESCARTES AND WESTERN MODERN

THE MIND NOT THE BODY CAN ARRIVE AT

RENE DESCARTES AND WESTERN MODERN

WHEN ONE THINKS, ONE

RENE DESCARTES AND WESTERN MODERN

IMMORTALITY OF THE EXISTENCE OF

THE SEARCH FOR TRUTH LEADS TO A DETACHMENT FROM THE MATERIAL

PHENOMENOLOGY EDMUND HUSSERL

scientific study of the essential structures of consciousness

we can find certainty, which philosophy has always sought

EXISTENTIALISM SOREN KIERKEGAARD

JEAN PAUL SARTE

POST ANALYTIC TRADITION

Language cannot objectively describe truth

LOGICAL AND CRITICAL THINKING

Distinguishing facts and opinions or personal feelings.

General to Specific (Deductive Reasoning)

Specific to General (Inductive Reasoning)

A STATEMENT OF JUDGEMENT OF A PERSON

STATEMENTS OF JUDGEMENT THAT ARE IN

OPINION JUSTIFICATION TRUTH

A PHILOSOPHICAL MIND MUST THEN BE PREPARED TO

FIRST CLARIFY IS ARGUMENT

ARGUMENT IS A GROUP OF STATEMENTS THAT

‘THERE IS NO HOPE IN THE PHILIPPINES

‘THERE IS NO HOPE IN THE PHILIPPINES GOVERNMENT

‘THERE IS NO HOPE IN THE PHILIPPINES GOVERNMENT

CONCLUSION OF THE REASONS USED

GENUINE ARGUMENT FALSE ONES OR

ARE A GROUP OF STATEMENTS THAT APPEAR

THERE IS NO HOPE IN THE PHILIPPINE

ARGUMENTUM FALLACIES ARGUMENTUM AD

THERE IS NO HOPE IN THE PHILIPPINE

ARGUMENTUM FALLACIES ARGUMENTUM AD

The rightness or wrongness of a claim should not be

VICTIM-BLAMING when it comes to

Used by people who want to win a conflict by issuing

Favorite tactic of politicians during campaign

Example: Politician A who had been reported to be

People should vote for politicians because of

Used by appealing to the popular sentiment of the

Favorite marketing strategy by advertising agencies